by Ann S. Waterman
[Editor’s note: This editorial originally appeared in Vol 33 Issue 4 of Hazard Prevention (now Journal of System Safety) in 4Q 1997. It has been reformatted from the original, but the text is otherwise unchanged. We note that in the 25 years since this article was published, “terminal acronymia” has gone from novel phenomenon to global engineering pandemic!]
“I don’t know what this means,” he ventured hesitantly after glancing at my note. I smiled. That was precisely my point.
What I had written, in response to his request for comments on his paper, was a long series of capital letters, broken into random threes and fours, and crammed mercilessly into already overburdened parentheses. Looking again at his own first page, he burst out laughing. Terminal acronymia, to be sure.
In the first paragraph, not one sentence consisted entirely of English words. Several consisted almost entirely of acronyms, some of which were being used to explain other acronyms. Some were not explained anywhere in sight, an apparent revision having bumped the definitions to subsequent pages. Still others were left entirely to the imagination, an option far more appealing than deciphering the text. I finally decided that DSAG stood for “desperately seeking a glossary.” “But everyone in my group understands these,” the gentleman protested, shaking his head. Perhaps, but his group wasn’t the intended audience. Who were the authors writing for? By definition, the goal of publishing is to reach a wide audience. Reaching them, though, is only the beginning.
Clearly, as technical writing becomes more widely disseminated through journals, conferences and the Internet, vital participants are being increasingly left out of the process: the readers. This is a trend that needs to be reversed before it renders technical writing pointless and therefore obsolete.
Respected engineering journals such as Hazard Prevention regularly publish articles that were originally written in a language other than English. No one would recommend publishing the original in an English language magazine because the majority of readers wouldn’t understand it; and yet authors continue to publish articles in a language that no one understands. For scientists, the logic must confound.
Those readers for whom English is a second language are being asked to learn a third one and translate twice. All readers are being asked to memorize definitions, or else to constantly flip back and forth. And what is their reward? The opportunity to try to forget this batch of acronyms and clear their brains for the lot in the next article. Yet authors seem to be oblivious, as they compete to create new and more imaginative acronyms to perpetuate the cycle.
The most baffling fact of all is that it seems much more excusable to publish in a foreign language than to ask engineers to separate from their acronyms. They have forgotten that other means of expression exist. “But I don’t want to say System Safety Working Group when I can say SSWG.” Of course you don’t. Say it once, and then “the group” will work just beautifully. After all, “the group” has two syllables, while “SSWG” has six. This is economizing?? Now think about other substitutions for most of your acronyms: “the system”; “the engineer”; “ review team”; “book”; “test suite.” And do we really need an acronym to say “start the engine,” “close the file” or “notify the boss”? Words are a scientist’s most powerful tool, since without them the others are meaningless.
“Words work. They have amazing clarity, speed and precision – if only people will take a shortcut and use them!”
Look at the bright side. With fewer acronyms you won’t have to worry about inadvertently spelling a word (as an embarrassed associate recently did with Numeric Engineering Requisition Directives), conveying the wrong image (as another did with GYN) or staring at a page for twenty minutes trying to figure out how to say it quickly (as a rushed proposal team did with NAWSEAWARENGSTA). Words work. They have amazing clarity, speed and precision – if only people will take a shortcut and use them!
Hazard Prevention has adopted a policy of ensuring that the articles we publish will be understood by a majority of its readers. In many cases, this means translating acronyms into plain English. We have entered into a brave and wondrous new world. Won’t you join us? Your readers are eagerly waiting.
About the Author
Ann Waterman is the former Editor-in-Chief and Publisher (1997-2007) of Hazard Prevention, the journal of the System Safety Society. She is a former director of the Society and the 2005 winner of the Society’s International award.